The cybercrime illusion: Examining the impact of cybercrime misbeliefs on perceptions of cybercrime seriousness
| Published date | 01 June 2023 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/26338076231174639 |
| Author | Erica R Fissel,Jin R Lee |
| Date | 01 June 2023 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
The cybercrime illusion:
Examining the impact of
cybercrime misbeliefs on
perceptions of cybercrime
seriousness
Erica R Fissel
University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA
Jin R Lee
George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA
Abstract
Though research examining cybercrime has surged in recent years, studies exploring percep-
tions concerning these phenomena have been scant. In fact, little is known regarding the
extent to which individuals perceive cybercrime as serious, whether exposure to cybercrime
terminology elicit similar perceptions of seriousness as behavioural descriptions of cyber-
crime, and the factors predicting perceptions of cybercrime seriousness. While research
examining offline crime has found a significant relationship between individuals’adoption of
misleading stereotypes and perceived crime seriousness, no study to date has explored this
association within a cybercrime context. As such, using data collected from 504 Mechanical
Turk adult respondents, the current study examined: (1) the extent to which individuals per-
ceived cybercrime (generally) as serious, (2) whether perceptions of cybercrime seriousness
were differentially influenced based on whether cybercrime terms (e.g., “hacking”,“cyber-
stalking”) were provided relative to behavioural definitions, and (3) whether respondents’
adoption of cybercrime misbeliefs significantly impacted perceptions of cybercrime serious-
ness, net of other factors (i.e., comfort with and use of technology, demographic traits).
The findings revealed that while more individuals perceived cybercrime as serious when
behavioural definitions were provided, the majority of respondents did not perceive cyber-
crime (generally) as serious. Further, greater adoption of cybercrime misbeliefs and frequent
device use were significant predictors of perceived cybercrime seriousness only when behav-
ioural definitions were given. In addition, older respondents were more likely to view
Corresponding author:
Erica R Fissel, University of Central Florida, 12805 Pegasus Dr, Bldg 80, HPA1, Orlando, FL, USA.
Email: erica.fissel@ucf.edu
Article
Journal of Criminology
2023, Vol. 56(2-3) 150–169
© The Author(s) 2023
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/26338076231174639
journals.sagepub.com/home/anj
cybercrime as serious, while men were less likely to view cybercrime as serious in both mod-
els. Collectively, the findings reveal the need for effective educational and awareness cam-
paigns, which are discussed in detail.
Keywords
Cybercrime, cybercrime myths, cybercrime misbeliefs, perceptions of cybercrimeseriou sness,
crime seriousness
Date received: 5 August 2022; accepted: 21 April 2023
Introduction
The growth and ubiquity of digital technology has transformed the way society functions,
including how individuals communicate, exchange information, and engage in commerce
(Yar, 2013). The pervasiveness of digital technology is underscored in a recent report that sug-
gests approximately 59.5% of the global population are Internet users, of which 92.6% (4.32
billion people) gain access through mobile devices such as laptops, tablet computers, and
smartphones (see Statista, 2021). Despite its various convenience factors, the advancement
of the Internet has concurrently engendered new forms of misconduct known as cybercrime.
These behaviours are generally understood as offences that occur in online environments or
use components of technology to facilitate harm (Furnell, 2002; Wall, 2007a). Cybercrime
includes behaviours that are dependent on digital technology (i.e., cyber-enabled), as well as
those that had a pre-existing offline form (i.e., cyber-assisted) but were enhanced as a result
of technology (see Lee, 2022). Although prevalence rates vary depending on the specific
behaviour in question, research has found that cybercrimes involving both human subjects
and non-human targets (e.g., computer systems, sensitive information) have risen exponentially
in recent years, with a sizeable number of individuals reporting cybercrime victimisation each
year (see Holt & Bossler, 2015).
Though estimates of cybercrime are valuable, these figures must not be interpreted as
absolute counts of cybercrime offending and victimisation. For one, the lack of cybercrime
measures in official crime statistics obstructs a more comprehensive understanding of the
cybercrime problem (Khiralla, 2020). Relatedly, a substantial number of cybercrime inci-
dents are either unreported by victims or unaccounted for due to individuals’unawareness
of the attack and lack of knowledge as to what constitutes a cybercrime incident (Goucher,
2010; Willits & Nowacki, 2016). The rapid development of technology and changing
dynamics of online behaviours may further contribute to this lack of recognition, as an
evolving list of cybercrime terms and behavioural descriptions may impede individuals’
identification and understanding of new and emerging forms of online misconduct (Holt
et al., 2022).
A failure to both identify cybercrime behaviours and adequately understand their conse-
quences may affect several behavioural outcomes, including individuals’reporting and help-
seeking behaviours, bystander interventions, and even willingness to offend (see Holt et al.,
2019; Horgan et al., 2021; Lee et al., 2021). Relatedly, this lack of understanding may
affect individuals’perceptions of cybercrime seriousness, which may equate to a lower alloca-
tion of public funds and law enforcement resources to combat such misconduct (see Koziarski
Fissel and Lee 151
To continue reading
Request your trial